Jump to content

Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy


trout
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Economic growth is similar. We do not need to keep creating more physical material or stuff for economies to grow.

 

I think you may be wrong here. Just sitting back and letting money make money is not a sustainable way of running a society. It will eventually collapse. We must manufacture stuff to make the world function. Obvious really.

 

Look at Chinese. In a decade they will be the number one economy.

 

When I wis a bairn over 95% of everything had ‘Made in England’ stamped on it. Let’s get some more ‘Made in Shetland’ stuff on the market and not depend on the FTSE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it true that the interconnector to the proposed Western Isles has been ruled out due to the huge cost? If true then surely there can be little hope of an interconnector here isn the foreseeable future?

 

Don't kid yourself....

The huge cost of the interconnector will be borne by someone else (mostly US...) and any cash generated from the investment(?) will be split with someone else..

It's a great 'business model' for those in the right place...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it true that the interconnector to the proposed Western Isles has been ruled out due to the huge cost? If true then surely there can be little hope of an interconnector here isn the foreseeable future?

 

It's not been ruled out as far as I know, but with a 75% increase in costs it has been put on hold for 12 month and talks are going on between the Scottish and UK governments and SHE / SSE. Not sure if there is any more up to date news.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-20800718

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it true that the interconnector to the proposed Western Isles has been ruled out due to the huge cost? If true then surely there can be little hope of an interconnector here isn the foreseeable future?

 

Don't kid yourself....

The huge cost of the interconnector will be borne by someone else (mostly US...) and any cash generated from the investment(?) will be split with someone else..

It's a great 'business model' for those in the right place...

 

I was under the impression that the cost of the installation is not borne by us, the consumer, but by operator of the windfarm and that transmission charges are reflective of the cost of the infrastructure.

 

I'm not sure what interconnector estimate relates to the £70 per kilowatt of installed capacity (which amounts to some £30 million per year charge) and if, like Lewis, these build costs increase, transmission charges can track significantly higher. It must be a huge uncertainty on the viability of VE and if not on the viability of VE, the reliability of estimates like the £20 million per year profit to the CT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the meantime, Viking must be costing a bit to run, with their directors and facilitators and project costs. is it being funded publicly or privately? If it ends up being a non-starter will the community stakeholders (wis) be left out of pocket? Are we still paying out a at time when education and social services are having to be cut back?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it true that the interconnector to the proposed Western Isles has been ruled out due to the huge cost? If true then surely there can be little hope of an interconnector here isn the foreseeable future?

 

Apparently the Scottish government is to intervene, according to this story from a couple of days ago.

 

http://www.hebrides-news.com/western_isles_subsea_energy_cable_25313.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the meantime, Viking must be costing a bit to run, with their directors and facilitators and project costs. is it being funded publicly or privately? If it ends up being a non-starter will the community stakeholders (wis) be left out of pocket? Are we still paying out a at time when education and social services are having to be cut back?

 

Funded by Shetland Charitable Trust who have given Viking sums of £3.6 milliom and £6.3 million - not that that money could have gone to COPE or pensioners or anything charitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What did they say when you suggested it to them?

 

As for the subsea cable, although those against VE may celebrate, it most certainly removes any plans to generate using tides and the such due to their cost to install/maintain per kw. As wind turbines are the cheapest and proved, they will be the preferred option. this could leave Shetland on the starting blocks when it comes to utilising natural resources. There fore, no injection of any money. Who loses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is what i was saying a couple of years ago.

the turbines yes will damage some healthy moor but that will be far surpassed by the amount of bog that they will restore.

 

as can be seen the birdlife will much prefer a restored moorland than what exists there now.

 

but SS wont have that oh no the moors are very healthy and are not damaged.

 

Remind me, how many SS meetings have you attended?

 

Are you in agreement that there are areas where the peat has recovered? Are you in agreement that many of the roads, concrete/cement/foundations, etc., will remain and won't be removed?

 

Have the methods proposed by VE with regard to the restoration been tried and tested in locations with the same climates/geographical conditions as Shetland?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...it is recognised that some of the management techniques described are relatively novel and unproven in the Shetland environment" [VE HMP 2010]

...so there is something in there about trials.

 

"We have included a Habitat Management Plan as part of our proposals that would help prevent further decline in the peat and try to restore it and the wildlife in this area." [VE Myth Buster]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Remind me, how many SS meetings have you attended?

 

That would not be the best place to go to get an unbiased opinion, it would be a totally pointless action unless of course you attended all the meetings that involved or mentioned the project.

As for turbines, I have heard more outrageous claims about their damage to the whole world and even attracting space debris.

Protest groups are not the place to glean reliable information.

If challenged, representatives would be obliged to stand by what they claim.

 

On balance, it after all these years, it is deemed acceptable to have VE installed, and of course the connecting cable, it would at least give about 20 years for others to perfect other sustainable power plants before the next round.

 

If the competition is about how many meetings one has to attend, does reading much of this count?

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=wind+turbine+cdebates+in+Parliament&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When there was a proposal to build a windfarm on one of the Western Isles a few years ago, the inevitable anti-group kicked up a huge fuss and made the outrageous claim that the windfarm would be so large it would be visible from space. Not a single human structure anywhere in the world is visable from space - not our largest cities, not the Great Wall of China (the longest man-made structure on the face of the Earth). You can see our light pollution, but that's it - nothing else.

 

However, thanks to some very shoddy reporting by the various news outlets, this 'fact' became widely reported and was treated as gospel. It isn't - it's nonsensical scaremongering of the worst kind.

 

The last people I would turn too for factual reference in regard to a windfarm would be the anti-brigade, simply because they are not accountable to anyone and can essentially claim what the hell they like. It doesn't help toward any meaningful discussion on what is always going to be an emotive subject. Their opinions are valid, of course. But I wouldn't necessarily take what they claim as fact at face value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For some reason, the council here will not approve turbines, the MOD have a say in it, one councillor said the turbine in his area would increase CO2 because the folk who live there would not want to walk their dogs near it in case they come to harm and would DRIVE to another area. Now then, when you see the mountains their dogs leave behind, it can only be a good thing.

 

Turbines reduce dog ch1t, good stuff!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • admin changed the title to Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...